My job getting a new CEO? Getting a new useless figurehead is supposed to scare me? Why? Youtube is going to block me? Why should I care? They either moderate hateful content, or they lose me and a great many others -voluntarily.
Like most people, I avoid companies that platform hate, and am perfectly contented being banned from them if they go that far. That's not a power they ever didn't have.
Because they are the party of oil and gas. And because the party of oil and gas has spent the last few decades tying every aspect of Albertan quality of life to O&G profits. The great circle of sludge.
I actually think we should just start an old-school crown corp that directly competes with the grocery stores. That's what crown corps used to do -push the private sector to do better through competition aimed at serving an important public need.
The crown corp could sell basic foods; produce, bread, simple meats and dairy products, and at a very low margin. The private grocers would have to compete either by tapping into that mysterious private-sector-efficiency to beat those prices, or via luxury grocery products that draw in customers. The crown corp could either build it's own supply chain, or rely on auctions, as needed.
mediabiasfactcheck.com is useful for it's "factual" measure of sources, but the right-left spectrum is based on what Americans consider "right" and "left" -so what they consider "far left," outside America is probably just "left." They label a lot of international centrist media sources as "left" too. What they consider "least biased" is going to be straight up capitalist.
There may be those who interpret the above as anti-democratic, and it absolutely is not. Constitutional democracy aims to create safeguards that protect minorities against majority will. They are weak safeguards, but they are not undemocratic.
No, it doesn't take away or give rights to provincial or federal governments. They don't have charter rights in the first place, only individuals have charter rights.
The notwithstanding clause permits the province to override people's charter rights. That may be justified sometimes, but it shouldn't be framed as anything else. It's removing rights, not granting them.
I'm just asking questions...
A person can choose to learn by repeating lies on social media so they can be "dog-piled" and have their statements picked apart, or they can google "what trans healthcare can minors access in Canada?" If they choose the former, they probably have thick skin by now.
How do you know story time is lead by burlesque performers? And how would you know if a woman in the library reading to kids is not also a night performer? You are the one making that connection. Gender and gendered clothing are not sex. The reason they are making a big deal out drag story time is to associate cross-dressing with sexual performance (i.e., inappropriate for kids). Why, you ask? So that the mere existence of trans women in our communities can be considered inappropriate.
I'm quick to pounce on both-sides-ism, but OP seems to make a clear criticism of the Liberals policy history without venturing there. On several portfolios, they have done pretty good work, but to imply that they can do nothing on housing affordability is disingenuous. The feds used to fund public housing, and they could do it again. They could work directly with municipalities if the provinces object (which they probably wouldn't).
They also regulate mortgage rules. Term lengths, stress tests, capital gains rules, etc. There are plenty of levers they could pull to make it easier for new home owners, and harder for real-estate speculators. They could also provide low interest mortgages, or interest relief, to designated groups.
but it will take until next year to see that show up in the store.
I really wish I wasn't so jaded. I can't bring myself to believe that. Hope I'm wrong.
"We're not middle and lower class, we're all working class"
Most home owners, if they cash out their home, and either rent or downsize, will still absolutely need to work to eat, and if they don't they will find themselves homeless before long.
For that small portion that could actually live on the equity from downsizing their housing, yeah, they are upper class, but there are a lot fewer of those than you would think. For a single person, a million in equity (50k a year) might get you by, but not luxuriously and not safely, and most houses are owned by couples though (so cut that in half), and many have dependents.